The right way to talk about something spoken by a Venerable would be to read what else he said, and discuss whatever else might apply. Not repeated badgering of me, trying to get me to be beholden to "nibbana does exist" and justify, expand and explain that statement to your satisfaction.

"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

The right way to talk about something spoken by a Venerable would be to read what else he said, and discuss whatever else might apply. Not repeated badgering of me, trying to get me to be beholden to "nibbana does exist" and justify, expand and explain that statement to your satisfaction.

Well, you are the one who put it out there. If you can not discuss or make sense of it, then may be you do not undederstand what it means.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

daverupa wrote: This would mean that a liberated mind can be perceived, but not a thing 'liberation'. So, too, one perceives a nibbanized mind, but not a thing 'nibbana'. (Both sentences have the same meaning, of course.)

And, of course, there is no "the mind" to be perceived.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

daverupa wrote: This would mean that a liberated mind can be perceived, but not a thing 'liberation'. So, too, one perceives a nibbanized mind, but not a thing 'nibbana'. (Both sentences have the same meaning, of course.)

And, of course, there is no "the mind" to be perceived.

Well, it would be that greed/hatred/delusion have ceased, ahead of & precipitating the final breakup of the aggregates, yes?

It's noting a lack, not noting "A-ha! Look there: a 'lack' has appeared."

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

daverupa wrote: This would mean that a liberated mind can be perceived, but not a thing 'liberation'. So, too, one perceives a nibbanized mind, but not a thing 'nibbana'. (Both sentences have the same meaning, of course.)

And, of course, there is no "the mind" to be perceived.

Well, it would be that greed/hatred/delusion have ceased, ahead of & precipitating the final breakup of the aggregates, yes?

It's noting a lack, not noting "A-ha! Look there: a 'lack' has appeared."

The core idea that I have trying to get at with all this is the Dhamma is not about things, objects, substances, identities. When one talks about "the Deathless" something is seriously lost. It suggests, intentionally or not, that there is some substantial, objective "Truth" out there that we can get. The Buddha suggests something radically different from that in terms of seeing what we are in terms of experiential process. There is a reason why the Buddha said: Who sees paticcasamuppada sees Dhamma, who sees Dhamma sees paticcasamuppda. - MN 1 190-1. Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process that we are, and nowhere else.

SN 2.26: It is in this very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that, I declare, lies the world, and the arising of the world, and the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world. [26]

26.The import of this significant declaration can be understood in the context of those suttas in which the Buddha defines the concept of the world. The 'world,' for the Buddha, arises in the six sense-spheres (See above Note 21). Hence its cessation too, is to be experienced there, in the cessation of the six sense-spheres (salaayatananirodha). "I will teach you, monks, how the world comes to be and passes away... What monks, is the arising of the world? Dependent on eye and forms, arises visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling, craving. Conditioned by craving, grasping. Conditioned by grasping, becoming. Conditioned by becoming, birth. And conditioned by birth, arise decay, death, grief lamentation, suffering, despair. This is the arising of the world. And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man[sic; should be 'mass'] of Ill." -- SN ii 73 CDB i 581http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... passage-10http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tml#fnt-26

"Monks, I will teach you the all. And what is the all? The eye and forms, the ear and sounds the nose and odors, the tongue and tastes, the body and touch, the mind and mental phenomena. This is called the all. If anyone, monks, should speak thus: ' Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all' - that would be a mere empty boast." SN IV 15.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:The core idea that I have trying to get at with all this is the Dhamma is not about things, objects, substances, identities. ...Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process that we are, and nowhere else.

That is identification.

"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

tiltbillings wrote:The core idea that I have trying to get at with all this is the Dhamma is not about things, objects, substances, identities. ...Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process that we are, and nowhere else.

That is identification.

Oh, please. I'd ask you to show how that use of conventional language is "identification," but likely you will refuse, as you so often have refused to engage in discussion of what is said, but you do like to throw out the brickbats. I'll rephrase:

Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process of conditioned co-production/paticcasamuppada, and nowhere else.

SN 2.26: It is in this very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that, I declare, lies the world, and the arising of the world, and the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world. 26

26.The import of this significant declaration can be understood in the context of those suttas in which the Buddha defines the concept of the world. The 'world,' for the Buddha, arises in the six sense-spheres (See above Note 21). Hence its cessation too, is to be experienced there, in the cessation of the six sense-spheres (salaayatananirodha). "I will teach you, monks, how the world comes to be and passes away... What monks, is the arising of the world? Dependent on eye and forms, arises visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling, craving. Conditioned by craving, grasping. Conditioned by grasping, becoming. Conditioned by becoming, birth. And conditioned by birth, arise decay, death, grief lamentation, suffering, despair. This is the arising of the world.

And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man[sic; should be 'mass'] of Ill." [-- SN ii 73 CDB i 581]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... passage-10http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tml#fnt-26

"Monks, I will teach you the all. And what is the all? The eye and forms, the ear and sounds the nose and odors, the tongue and tastes, the body and touch, the mind and mental phenomena. This is called the all. If anyone, monks, should speak thus: ' Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all' - that would be a mere empty boast." SN IV 15.

". . . the perception of impermanence should be cultivated for the removal of the conceit 'I am.' For when one perceives impermanence, Meghiya, the perception of not-self is established. When one perceives not-self one reaches the removal of the conceit 'I am,' which is called Nibbana here and now." U iv 1.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Oh, please. I'd ask you to show how that use of conventional language is "identification," but likely you will refuse, as you so often have refused to engage in discussion of what is said, but you do like to throw out the brickbats.

That's for each of us to examine within our own minds, of course, whether we identify with the experiential process of conditioned co-production.

I'll rephrase:

Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process of conditioned co-production/paticcasamuppada, and nowhere else.

Paticcasamuppada tells of the cessation of the experiential process.

"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

tiltbillings wrote:Oh, please. I'd ask you to show how that use of conventional language is "identification," but likely you will refuse, as you so often have refused to engage in discussion of what is said, but you do like to throw out the brickbats.

That's for each of us to examine within our own minds, of course, whether we identify with the experiential process of conditioned co-production.

In other words, your brickbat was gratuitous, without substance, not engaging what was said.

tiltbillings wrote:Truth/Dhamma is to be seen/known/experienced in terms of the experiential process of conditioned co-production/paticcasamuppada, and nowhere else.

As long as you're including paticcasamuppada in its cessation mode too... as that's actually how amata is to be seen/known/experienced.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

tiltbillings wrote:Interestingly enough the Buddha did not specify that in this text: Who sees paticcasamuppada sees Dhamma, who sees Dhamma sees paticcasamuppda. - MN 1 190-1.

Which interestingly enough doesn't specify amata at all... which makes it not quite so interesting after all, in the context of this topic.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

Which makes your objection seem rather petty then, since not only was my post "directly relevant to the context of this topic" it was also about the experience of amata.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

I just found an interesting Note by Thanissaro that deals with the translation of ajātaṃ as unborn as opposed to without birth which is similar to Tilt's translation which is freedom from birth. Anyway, I was just wondering if Tilt or anyone else who uses the without/freedom from translation would like to explain whether Ven Thanissaro's argument changes anything or why it doesn't. Personally, the without birth/ freedom from birth translation makes more sense to me but I was just wondering if Thanissaro has a point here or not.

Note

1.Some scholars have argued that the term "unborn" cannot be used to distinguish unbinding from transmigration, as there are discourses (such as SN 15.3) stating that transmigration itself has no beginning point, implying that it too is unborn. Thus they argue that in this passage the term ajātaṃ, although a past participle, should be translated as, "without birth." However, this argument is based on two questionable premises. First, it assumes that unbinding is here being contrasted with transmigration, even though the passage simply contrasts it with the fabricated. Secondly, even assuming that the phrase "the born — the become," etc., is a reference to transmigration, the scholars' argument is based on a misreading of SN 15.3. There, transmigration is said to have an "inconceivable" or "undiscoverable" beginning point. This is very different from saying that it is unborn. If transmigration were unborn, it would be unfabricated (see AN 3.47), which is obviously not the case. Thus, in translating this term to describe unbinding, I have maintained the straight grammatical reading, "unborn."2.Iti 43 gives this exclamation as the synopsis of a Dhamma talk, followed by this verse:

Just read through this thread with interest, up to about page 13. Thanissaro's note does not address Tilt's point, as it does not consider the grammatical interpretation which is the basis for his argument.

polarbuddha101 wrote: Anyway, I was just wondering if Tilt or anyone else who uses the without/freedom from translation would like to explain whether Ven Thanissaro's argument changes anything or why it doesn't. Personally, the without birth/ freedom from birth translation makes more sense to me but I was just wondering if Thanissaro has a point here or not.

What Ven Thaissaro says does not come anywhere close to addressing the points I raised in the above discussion.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.